On Mon, 16 May 2005, Skyring wrote:
On 5/16/05, Pete/Pcb21 pete_pcb21_wpmail@pcbartlett.com wrote:
Ultra-short summary of previous debates:
Pro-CE) AD = "Year of Our Lord" thus is POV. Use CE. Pro-AD) No AD is more widely used and WP is not a vehicle for advocacy for change, so stick to AD. Pro-CE) But that is ignorance. We should be correct and neutral, not sheep-followers of the majority. Pro-AD) I am not Christian nor ignorant, but still use AD as the "standard". Adovacy is a bigger POV problem than origins of common terms being POV.
The horse has long bolted. CE has been common usage for decades in an expanding circle of groups, most notably those of science or academia.
The Christians trying to contain the infection are as ultimately risible as the French trying to keep their language pure by opposing terms such as "le weekend". Christian belief is something that comes from the heart, not from strict adherence to the display of symbols.
The "standardists" may have a better moral case, but I see them as like those who grew up with the Imperial system of measurement and staunchly resist the metric system because they aren't used to the terms. Oddly enough, within the British Commonwealth these same people didn't have any problem in grasping decimal currency after conversion from pounds, shillings and pence. If they *really* have a problem with BCE rather than BC, then the standardists are picking the smallest of nits.
CE/BCE is already a standard in many disciplines. Make it so in WP.
And here we can see several reasons why this proposal stirs up so much resistance.
* The assertion that because the style "CE/BCE" is "common usage", it should be exclusive usage. A confusion of categories: is there any proof that if an academic or scientist uses the style "AD/BC", that the editor will change it or reject the submission? (A glance at my copy of the MLA Handbook only discusses how to use both correctly -- although it does discourage use of the once hallowed "ibid." & "op. cit.") * That usage amongst certain groups -- i.e., academics -- is preferable to usage amongst other groups. Appeal to authority: I would hope that if academics have unamimously embraced this style, that there are a number of readily-available -- & published essays -- that eloquently & convincingly explain why one style is preferable to another. * That the only people who would resist using this style do so for reasons of faith. A straw man argument: I prefer "AD/BC" over "CE/BCE" because that was the style that I felt was the most authentic for me. I am currently not a member of any religion, although at one point in my past I did embrace neo-paganism. * That the style "CE/BCE" is universally embraced except for a few implictly out-of-fashion groups. Assertion without proof: I was not aware that the of "AD/BC" has gone the way of isenglas & mimeograph printing.
I suspect many people who defend the use of "AD/BC" tend towards emotional arguments because they are not familiar with how to make meta-lingusitic arguments -- which I admit is difficult to do, & harder to do well. In effect, we who prefer that style are being told we are wrong & are accused of causing offense where none is intended, but the reasons offered fail to convince us how or why; & when we protest, we are perjoratively labelled (i.e., "Christians"), & condemned. This sorta goes against the ideal of [[Assume good faith]].
Geoff